Kaufman & Broad Communities, Inc. v. Performance Plastering, Inc.

Bad Law
133 Cal. App. 4th 26·2005 Cal. App. LEXIS 1558·2005 Daily Journal DAR 11938·34 Cal. Rptr. 3d 520·2005 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8754
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 3, 2005No. C049391California5,056 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Sims, J.

*29 Opinion

Pursuant to rule 22(a) of the California Rules of Court, appellant Performance Plastering, Inc., has moved this court to take judicial notice of various documents that, in the view of appellant, constitute cognizable legislative history of a 1998 amendment to Revenue and Taxation Code section 19719 (Assembly Bill No. 1950 (1997-1998 Reg. Sess.) (Assem. Bill No. 1950)). (Stats. 1998, ch. 856, § 2.)

I

Legislative History Generally

Before turning to the specifics of appellant’s request for judicial notice, we have some general comments about requests for judicial notice of legislative history received by this court.

Many attorneys apparently believe that every scrap of paper that is generated in the legislative process constitutes the proper subject of judicial notice. They are aided in this view by some professional legislative intent services. Consequently, it is not uncommon for this court to receive motions for judicial notice of documents that are tendered to the court in a form resembling a telephone book. 1 The various documents are not segregated and no attempt is made in a memorandum of points and authorities to justify each request for judicial notice. This…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.